Ahailono o ka Lahui, Volume I, Number 18, 30 January 1890 — Page 2Page PDF (1.06 MB)
The following are the last days allowed to the electors of Honolulu for registering their names, failure of which will deprive them of their right to vote:
First District, First Precinct, on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday from 4 to 8 p.m.
Second District, Second Precinct, on Tuesday and Friday from 5 to7 :30p.m .
Second District, First Precinct, on Monday (3 to 6), Wednesday, (7 to 9) and Friday (2 to 6).
Second District, Second Precinct, on Monday, Tuesday and Friday from 7 to 9 p.m.
Third District, First Precinct, on Monday, Wednesday and Friday from 7 to 9p.m.
Third District, Second Precinct, on Monday and Thursday from 7 to 9p.m.
Fourth District, First Precinct, on Tuesday (7 to 9) and Friday (6 to 9)
Fourth District, Second Precinct, on Friday only, from 4 to 8 p.m.
Fifth District, First Precinct, on Monday and Friday from 7 to 9 p.m.
Fifth District, Second Precinct, Wednesday (4 to 7) and Friday 2 to 8 p.m.
The National Herald.
Honolulu, Jan. 30, 1890.
NOBODY’S darling---the Advertiser! Somebody’s darling---the Times!
BEHIND the Times---L.A. Thurston! Ahead of the Times---the National Reform party!
DOES any good brother know whether Long John & Co. found McGinty at any of the corners visited the other day? This joke is Fuller of Political meaning than some may think!
TO-MORROW night, at 7:30 o’clock, in the Rifles Armory, Beretania street , a general meeting of the eletors of the National Reform party, belonging to the Third District will be held. Electors of the adjoining district are cordially invited.
THE Times wants to know fo the opposition party who constitutes the obnoxious foreign element referred to by Mr. Rosa in a s speech of his. As Mr. R. explained the point over his own signature, would it not be well for the Times to refer to his letter for the information sought?
RECIPROCITY from the American standpoint—the position taken by the National Reform party! Reciprocity as misunderstood by the “enegetic idiots” of the government party—the free trade madness which they propose to force upon the United States “first, last and every time”!
THE meeting of Inspectors of Election for the purpose of registering voters in Precinct 2, District 5, was not held yesterday as advertise owing to the absence of two inspectors. One of the absentees, Mr. T.A. Lloyd, is a government officer and no reason is assigned for his absence. Mr. A Fernandez was suffering from sore eyes. Mr. W.L. Wilcox was on hand but was powerless to act alone. A great many people came to register and the same number went away disappointed. Still the fact remains that we have election inspectors and if their meetings fail to coincide with announcements in the papers, probably reasons exist known to their superiors but judiciously kept from the knowledge of the people.
The persistent course of blundering pursued by the “existing administration” has, within the last two days, been topped with a master stroke of unskilled journalism, which we now prophesy will start the ball rolling that will ultimately knock from under us, if not checked, the benefits of American commercial protection whih we receive throught the reciprocity treaty. We refer to the advocacy of the free trade doctrine by a few non-Americans, who are controlling and directing the policy of the present government, together with the illtimed utterances of the government organ, the Daily Times. This time we write in sorrow for our future prospects and in pity for the “energetic idiots” whose foolish course in advocating “the boon of perpetual free trade,” will be used by our enemies as the chief factor in destroying the benefits of American commercial protection which we now enjoy.
We call the men advocating this foolish free trade doctrine “energetic idiots.” It is not a misnomer. The men who will raise such a dangerous issue at the pressnt time and give utterance to such un-American sentiments as they have, are worthy the rude epithet! It is unfortunate for Hawaii that our ministerial blunderers have uttered such sentiments just before the question of the continuance of our commercial protection is to be again discussed. Why? Because the enemies of the reciprocity treaty already have their agents in this kingdom collecting data for the coming fight to be made in Washington against the continuance of this treaty when the question next comes up.
We speak from certain information in saying that one of the anti-treaty agents in Honolulu is now in high spirits over this latest and greatest ministerial blunder and is dilligently collecting every utterance of the free trade advocates for future use against us. These utterances after beig carefully edited and annotated, with a host of other facts against our reciprocity treaty added thereto, will be forwarded to the United States almost as soon as our coming election is over. These are absolute facts. They are unfortunate facts for our merchants and our planters, as well as for every man in this kingdom who is endeavoring to develop one or more of our possible small industries.
It is a pity that these “energetic idiots,” who forced themselves upon the country by force of arms, did not have practical sense enough to be silent upon this free trade doctrine. It is a pity the country is saddled with such a set of men and it is a double pity that our merchants, our planters and the people generally will have to bear the political blame and commercial injury almost certain to follow such a boyish political policy. The charge long ago made against the present ministers of being too young is already verified. To this charge can now be added the graver charges of political ability and an open design to sacrifice the interests of Hawaii in order to gain, if possible, a few votes for the government ticket between this and election.
Who is responsible? The entire government party, including every candidate on the government ticket, who remains silent and refuses to repudiate this free trade madness between this and election day ! The fight to be made in Washington when reciprocity again comes up is to be made by the anti-treaty men from our very midst. Suh facts are well known to bona fide Americans who are posted and these facts were to be kept our of sight until a government was secured through the coming election who would be pledged to stamp out the suicidal policy followed by the present rebel government during the last two years. This course would have been carried out with every chance of success for our treaty had not these ministerial blunderers sprung this free trade madness upon the country in hopes of retaining control of the government in the interests of the family compact and the non-American political clique.
If the present ministry assume they are acting for the good of this kingdom, we shall be able in a few days to undeceive them and the public generally. The whole truth about the origin and purpose of that attempted new treaty has not yet been told and it will throw a flood of light upon the present insensate course of the “existing administration.” It is now proper to state the following fact which a few short months will prove to the Hawaiian public to be absolutely correct: viz the men who drew the late propsed treaty, then denied it, now acknowledge it and foolishly try to justify it by urging the doctrine of free trade, are trying a political experiment for policy’s sake without the knowledge, endorsement or consent of the United States Government. The men who drew the National Reform party’s platform and established the policy to be carried out, if the eletion is wom, know exactly what they are doing and have probable assurance from the best of sources that the treaty can be carried to a continuance, provided the government is so run that all classes of our people shall receive its benefits and the native autonomy of the Hawaiian government be protected at home!
AND now the Times discovers that the treaty subject is sensitive. It thinks two years appeal to the passions of the native people has rendered them adverse to any extended treaty relations with the United States. Our whole population is in favor of treaty relations—with that country. But no one outside of an interested clique, who would sacrifice public weal to private gain is in favor of any treaty purchased at the price of our autonomy. Will the Times kindly outline the treaty relations it advocates with the United States? Will it place itself on record as an advocate of the infamous bargain which Mr. Carter carried round in his pocket while here? The Times finds fault with the phraseology of the National Reform platform which “countenances” the present treaty. It is afraid the United State will take exception to the word, as not sufficiently enthusiastic, etc. What rot! Countenances mean approves, and the organ knows there is nothing ungracious to America in it. It knows the National Reform party is in favor of extended reciprocity relations with the United States. But it does not seem to know that the National Reform party is better posted on our future treaty relations than the present government is! And the organ further knows that the National Reform party does not countenance any treaty which secures private prosperity by the entailment of national suicide.
--Our candidates are required to promote and defend all measures for the advantage of the working classes .— National Reform Platform.
THE Advertiser clearly demonstrates to the Bulletin that as the National Reform platform was formulated as an expression of the wishes of its adherents some time prior to the epitome offered as an apology by the government party in deference to the public sentiment, therefore the former must be a plagiarism of the latter. Chronology cuts an important figure in plagiarism It would be absurd to assert that Patrick Henry uttered what Stephen A. Douglas intended to say. The Advertiser was the organ of a party whivh it asserts to be anti-Chinese editorial, unless the statement made a day or two since that the coolie question was a “side issue” be entitled to rank as such. Plagiarism of the Advertiser’s position on this question would narrow down to a few sentimental letters from a woman denouncing Mr. Kalua for his attitude against John.
We believe that certain public offices might be satisfactorily filled by election of the people and recommend the question to the thoughtful consideration of the legislature .— National Reform Platform.
THE Bulletin see-sawing on the question of official trnure, finds objections to the removal of Hon. C.R. Bishop from the Presidency of the Board of Education. The Hon. C.R. Bishop makes th usual respectable figure head in that position. His retention or removal would have about as much effect on the educational policy as the retention or removal of any article of furniture from th educational office. The Board of Education is, as it has always beem, the secretary. The President is a dummy and it does not matter much whether he be called Bishop or Binks. The inspector general is degraded to a pony express and his functions are those of errand boy for the secretary. The educational polity hangs on the caprice of a man whose duties should be simply clerical, but who, by reason of personal push and usurpation, has succeeded in absorbing all functions connected with the department. So Mr. Bishop usefulness educationally will be unaffected by retention or removal. Each succeeding board is found useful principally to reappoint the same secretary to continue the usurpation of its privileges. The argument of the Bulletin that the honorary president receives no pay does not justify him in neglecting duties imposed on him by law or in delegating his authority to a subordinate.